Main > Everything Else

Discussion: Ultracade and the Mame Trademark

<< < (37/154) > >>

JODY:
I think since he has a problem with 4000 games sellers would put together discs of freeware games and advertise the systems play 10,000 games.

Gamecab:
 >:(

Tommy Boy:

--- Quote from: 1UP on February 21, 2005, 07:01:23 pm ---BTW, this is just one more in the long list of obstacles I've encountered on my long road to market legal cabinets.  I've sorted out all the other issues holding me back, and now this?  :(

Contrary to this guy's assertions, it is possible to license packages of StarRoms in the end-user's name at the time of sale.  I have verified this personally with the StarRoms sales team.

So my cabs will feature legally obtained, properly licensed games ONLY, and the user is required to obtain and install MAME themselves to comply with the wishes of the MAMEdevs.  Yet I may be held back by this stupid trademark from even mentioning Mame on my site. In the words of Q*bert, @&^*%!!!

--- End quote ---
I know that there are lots of opinions on this topic and few lawyers with real answers (and IANAL)...but let's assume for a minute that he does get a TM for MAME (a big "IF" in my opinion).  How does that really impact products such as yours 1up?  Your cabs won't say "MAME" anywhere on them, right?  If your product doesn't use the name or logo, then you have no need to license anything from Foley.  If you mention "MAME" on your website as part of your literature, then as long as you provide the proper attributions (e.g. TM - property of so-and-so) you should be alright.  In this very peculiar case, he doesn't own the rights to MAME, only the "brand".  But competitors use the brand names of their competition all the time in adds and literature -- they just provide proper attribution.

Patent Doc:
OK

I'm almost finished with my spewing on trademarks.

Patent Doc:
registered trademarks get the

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version